Other affiliations: Paris School of Economics
Bio: Sean Dougherty is an academic researcher from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The author has contributed to research in topics: Productivity & Government. The author has an hindex of 16, co-authored 54 publications receiving 730 citations. Previous affiliations of Sean Dougherty include Paris School of Economics.
Papers published on a yearly basis
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined the impact of employment protection legislation and related regulation on the dynamics of employment in the organized sector of the economy, using newly constructed measures of national regulation and state labour reforms.
Abstract: Over the past decade, labour market outcomes have improved in India, with net employment rising markedly for the economy as a whole. However, these gains have arisen primarily in the unorganized and informal sectors of the economy, where productivity and wages are generally much lower than in the formal organized sector. It is only India’s organized sector that is subject to labour market regulation, and here employment has fallen. The role of employment protection legislation in affecting employment outcomes is controversial both in the OECD area and in India. This paper looks at the impact of employment protection legislation and related regulation on the dynamics of employment in the organized sector of the economy, using newly constructed measures of national regulation and state labour reforms. We find that while reforms have taken some of the bite out of core labour laws, more comprehensive reforms are needed to address the distortions that have emerged. This working paper relates to the 2007 Economic Survey of India (www.oecd.org/eco/surveys/india).
TL;DR: The authors assesses the progress of China's transition towards a market economy by examining the structure of ownership, productivity, and profitability, as well as the concentration of production across firms, industries, and regions.
Abstract: This paper assesses the progress of China's transition towards a market economy by examining the structure of ownership, productivity, and profitability, as well as the concentration of production across firms, industries, and regions. It does this by analyzing a database of firm microdata of the quarter of a million industrial companies in operation during the 1998–2003 period. Results show that the private sector now accounts for more than half of industrial output, compared with barely more than a quarter of it in 1998, and operates much more efficiently than the public sector. Higher productivity has fed through to improved profitability, motivating greater regional specialization of production. These changes are consistent with what would be expected in a market-based economy and suggest that reforms are making rapid progress.
TL;DR: In this paper, the impact of employment protection legislation on total factor productivity (TFP) and labour productivity in India was investigated using data from the ASI for the period from 1998-99 through 2007-08.
Abstract: Using plant-level data from the Annual Survey of Industries (ASI) for the fiscal years from 1998-99 through 2007-08, this study provides plant-level cross-state/time-series evidence of the impact of employment protection legislation (EPL) on total factor productivity (TFP) and labour productivity in India. Identification of the effect of EPL follows from a difference-in-differences estimator inspired by Rajan and Zingales (1998) that takes advantage of the state-level variation in labour regulation and heterogeneous industry characteristics. The fundamental identification assumption is that EPL is more likely to restrict firms operating in industries with higher labour intensity and/or higher sales volatility. Our results show that firms in labour intensive or more volatile industries benefited the most from labour reforms in their states. Our point estimates indicate that, on average, firms in labour intensive industries and in flexible labour markets have TFP residuals 14% higher than those registered for their counterparts in states with more stringent labour laws. However, no important differences are identified among plants in industries with low labour intensity when comparing states with high and low levels of EPL reform. Similarly, the TFP of plants in volatile industries and in states that experienced more pro-employer reforms is 11% higher than that of firms in volatile industries and in more restrictive states; however, the TFP residuals of plants in industries with low labour intensity are 11% lower in high EPL reform states than in states with lower levels of EPL reform. In sum, the evidence presented here suggests that the high labour costs and rigidities imposed through Indian federal labour laws are lessened by labour market reforms at the state level.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors compare the growth prospects of China and India through a growth accounting analysis, using a series of time series for capital stock and employment data, and incorporating recent revisions to the national accounts for both countries are incorporated.
Abstract: This paper compares the growth prospects of China and India through a growth accounting analysis. Consistent time series for capital stock and employment are constructed using available survey data, and recent revisions to the national accounts for both countries are incorporated. The results allow for a discussion of the sources of growth in both countries, and a consideration of each country's rate of potential growth in light of the outlook for national savings, as demographic shifts occur in each country. JEL Classification: E20, O11, O47, P52 Keywords: Growth accounting; potential growth; capital measurement; demographics; China; India 1. Introduction China and India, as the fastest-growing of the 'BRIC' economies, occupy a special place in the imagination of observers in the OECD and elsewhere. Despite their low incomes, their sheer size combined with rapid growth means that they make a substantial and rapidly growing contribution to world output. The success or failure of each country to maintain their rapid growth into the future will have a tremendous impact not only on their own economies but on the world economy as a whole. Moreover, with populations of 1.3 and 1.1 billion, respectively, their rapid growth has the potential to raise living standards significantly for a third of the world's population, bringing hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and creating a middle class that rivals the EU and US in both size and income. In both countries, growth has accelerated in recent decades as trade liberalisation and market-oriented structural reforms have deepened. A glance at both countries' experience suggests a number of similarities in their reform paths. Despite very different political systems, both countries followed a reform path that markedly reduced the role of the government in economic activity and allowed a greater degree of openness to foreign trade. Reform started earlier in China than in India. Moreover, the opening to trade has proceeded at a much more rapid pace in China. Indeed, by the beginning of this decade, India was still one of the most highly protected economies in the world. On the other hand, India has always had a stronger private sector. Moreover, while the private sector was subject to considerable constraints on its investment planning, these largely ended in the early 1990s. However, in China the private sector has only emerged in past decade, as the result of a more favourable legal framework and the sale of government-owned assets. A careful description of these countries' sequence of reforms is elaborated elsewhere and we will not dwell on the policy details here.2 Nevertheless, it is important to note that China's transition started somewhat earlier and involved greater change than in India since it was, on the whole, further from being a market economy. However, both countries' reforms are still ongoing, so it would be premature to judge only past progress. Looking forward, despite immense reforms and impressive growth, there has been considerable scepticism about the sustainability of China's growth in particular. Especially over the past few years, when growth has broached double-digit rates, questions about the extent to which it can be sustained without creating inflationary pressures or incurring large batches of new non-performing loans are often heard in the press. For India, the situation is nearly reversed: many observers have thought that India can and should grow faster than the 6% average that it attained over the past ten years. Recent marked increases in investment suggest that the economy can indeed grow faster than this on a sustainable basis - at around 8½ per cent annually if the increase in investment is not just a cyclical phenomenon. Indeed, many political leaders have argued that India should be able to grow even faster over the medium-term. For China, we will argue that that current growth rates are not markedly different from potential growth rates and so that concerns about overheating are not warranted but that the case that growth will need to slow down over the medium term seems strong. …
TL;DR: The authors examines recent micro-evidence on the productivity of Indian firms, helping to explain why India's manufacturing sector has not performed as well as many observers expected, and suggests that much remains to be done to improve the strength and sustainability of India's development path.
Abstract: This article examines recent micro-evidence on the productivity of Indian firms, helping to explain why India’s manufacturing sector has not performed as well as many observers expected. A series of structural distortions are documented, all of which may depress the performance of manufacturing, and thus the economy as a whole. These distortions exist at multiple levels, and reflect long-standing problems with the reallocation of labour across sectors, the excessively small scale of firms, low firm turnover, poor product market integration, high industry concentration and persistent state ownership. Combined, these phenomena represent severe restraints on the level and growth of productivity in manufacturing, and suggest that much remains to be done to improve the strength and sustainability of India’s development path.
TL;DR: The authors presented the first comprehensive set of firm-level total factor productivity (TFP) estimates for China's manufacturing sector that spans China's entry into the WTO and found that net entry accounts for over two thirds of total TFP growth.
Abstract: We present the first comprehensive set of firm-level total factor productivity (TFP) estimates for China's manufacturing sector that spans China's entry into the WTO. For our preferred estimate, which adjusts for a number of potential sources of measurement error and bias, the weighted average annual productivity growth for incumbents is 2.85% for a gross output production function and 7.96% for a value added production function over the period 1998–2007. This is among the highest compared to other countries. Productivity growth at the industry level is even higher, reflecting the dynamic force of creative destruction. Over the entire period, net entry accounts for over two thirds of total TFP growth. In contrast to earlier studies looking at total non-agriculture including services, we find that TFP growth dominates input accumulation as a source of output growth.
••01 Sep 2008
TL;DR: The authors presents a story of two Chinas, an entrepreneurial rural China and a state-controlled urban China, and uses the emerging Indian miracle to debunk the widespread notion that democracy is automatically anti-growth.
Abstract: Presents a story of two Chinas – an entrepreneurial rural China and a state-controlled urban China. In the 1980s, rural China gained the upper hand. In the 1990s, urban China triumphed. In the 1990s, the Chinese state reversed many of its rural experiments, with long-lasting damage to the economy and society. A weak financial sector, income disparity, rising illiteracy, productivity slowdowns, and reduced personal income growth are the product of the capitalism with Chinese characteristics of the 1990s and beyond. While GDP grew quickly in both decades, the welfare implications of growth differed substantially. The book uses the emerging Indian miracle to debunk the widespread notion that democracy is automatically anti-growth. As the country marked its 30th anniversary of reforms in 2008, China faces some of its toughest economic challenges and substantial vulnerabilities that require fundamental institutional reforms.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors evaluate the international location decisions made by public listed Chinese firms during the period 2006-2008, using a Poisson count data regression model, and categorize the firms into state-controlled and privately owned according to majority ownership.
Abstract: This article evaluates the international location decisions made by public listed Chinese firms during the period 2006–2008, using a Poisson count data regression model. Further, we categorize the firms into state-controlled and privately owned according to majority ownership. We find that the determinants of internationalization differ based on ownership. State-controlled firms are attracted to countries with large sources of natural resources and risky political environments. Private firms are more market seekers. Although all firms have strategic intent, the attraction is commercially viable technology rather than core research content. Our findings also show that existing theories can sufficiently explain the actions of private Chinese firms, but adjustments are needed to understand the behavior of state-controlled multinationals.
01 Jan 2010
TL;DR: In this article, the International Seminar on Information and Communication Technology Statistics, 19-21 July 2010, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 19 and 21 July 2010 was held. [
Abstract: Meeting: International Seminar on Information and Communication Technology Statistics, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 19-21 July 2010
TL;DR: In this article, the authors evaluate what we have learned to date about the effects of privatization from the experiences during the last fifteen to twenty years in the postcommunist (transition) economies and, where relevant, China.
Abstract: In this paper, we evaluate what we have learned to date about the effects of privatization from the experiences during the last fifteen to twenty years in the postcommunist (transition) economies and, where relevant, China. We distinguish separately the impact of privatization on efficiency, profitability, revenues, and other indicators and distinguish between studies on the basis of their econometric methodology in order to focus attention on more credible results. The effect of privatization is mostly positive in Central Europe, but quantitatively smaller than that to foreign owners and greater in the later than earlier transition period. In the Commonwealth of Independent States, privatization to foreign owners yields a positive or insignificant effect while privatization to domestic owners generates a negative or insignificant effect. The available papers on China find diverse results, with the effect of nonstate ownership on total factor productivity being mostly positive but sometimes insignificant or negative.